inquirer. so we should point out hicks says this evidence does not contradict what she says and her attorney says she stands by not knowing about the hush money payments in october. we showed just a couple exams, did hope hicks lie? that s a tough one, the reason it s tough, she was very, very careful in the words she chose. when she testified before the house committee, those words matter, to use words like, i don t recall, she used that qualifier, no direct knowledge, even the word, i wasn t present. for any conversations. that kind of excludes phone calls. exactly. she was very careful, and also the evidence that the southern district of new york had at the time, those were toll records, it s great circumstantial evidence because it shows contacts between the relevant parties, it doesn t show the substance of those calls. so it s not proof?
david pecker. he has already bought the rights, killed the story. but they re worried about ami having it in their files, and david pecker getting hit by a bus or a truck that might not be illegal, but it sure seems sleazy, and the campaign lied about it. doesn t it seem sleazy to you? well, i think the big picture is we shouldn t know any of this conversation. all this conversation was decided by a former judge to be lawyer/client privileged information. it s a lawyer and a client talking to each other about whether to pay by cash or check, whether to make this deal, whether to not make the deal. that s the kind of conversation i have every day with my clients. i don t tape the conversations, and i certainly don t leak them. i think the big question that we need to know the answer to is who leaked this tape? in who s advantage it is to have this tape you don t think the big question we need an answer to is why did hope hicks lie about it and why did the president lie about it an
it is unlessing in happens to the company. the tape makes it pretty clear the president are trying to get the rights to the story as we have been discussing. he had already bought the rights and killed the story. they are worried about having it in their files and david pecker getting hit by a bus or a truck. that may not be illegal but it sure seems sleazy and the campaign lied about it. doesn t it seem sleazy to you? the big picture is we shouldn t know all of this conversation. it is a lawyer and a client talking to each other about whether to pay by cash or check or whether to make the deal or not make the deal. that s the conversation i have every day. i don t tape the conversations and i certainly don t leak them. i think the big question is who leaked this tape and whose advantage was it to have this tape you don t think the big answer is why did hope hicks lie
it. and they are having nothing to hang on to except the president s loyalty. we have to go back to the idea that they are saying the president won t pardon himself because he did nothing wrong. well sarah sanders, we all saw she s a liar from the po about the trump tower statement. we ve seen hope hicks lie. jay sekulow lie about it. they didn t do that on their own. someone told them to do that. it is e reasonable to speculate that the president told them to lie about that. that is something wrong. that is why robert mueller has to sit donald trump down and ask him about it to finalize that report. and if he doesn t sit down with him and give his side of the story for what happened, in regard to that statement, that is an admission of guilt. go ahead. i also think that to remember that the main audience for all of this isn t really us. this is just and republicans in congress. it is just more muddying the water and so they could say that well no, but the president can do